Cases

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Fameux (2022 NY Slip Op 00464) Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Fameux 2022 NY Slip Op 00464 Decided on January 26, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting B

U.S. Bank N.A. v Wongsonadi (2022 NY Slip Op 02035) U.S. Bank N.A. v Wongsonadi 2022 NY Slip Op 02035 Decided on March 23, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau purs

U.S. Bank N.A. v Dayan (2021 NY Slip Op 03626) U.S. Bank N.A. v Dayan 2021 NY Slip Op 03626 Decided on June 9, 2021 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judi

OPINION SIMANDLE, Chief Judge: I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Charlene Martinez brings this putative class action against Defendants TD Bank USA, N.A. (“TD Bank”) and Target Corporation (“Target”), alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227; the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“RFDCPA”), Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1788-1788.33; and California

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Ciurleo (2025 NY Slip Op 07039) Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Ciurleo 2025 NY Slip Op 07039 Decided on December 17, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

SUMMARY ORDER Appellants Marilyn Matheson and Yvonne Chaplin, proceeding pro se, appeal from the District Court’s orders sua sponte dismissing with prejudice their complaint against, inter alia, various banks, mortgage servicers, and New York state judges, for failure to state a claim, and denying their motion for a preliminary injunction to prevent the sale of Mathe-son’s residence. In a complaint exceeding 100 page

U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v Goldin (2018 NY Slip Op 02825) U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v Goldin 2018 NY Slip Op 02825 Decided on April 25, 2018 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Burea

SEAN C. GALLAGHER, J.: {¶ 1} Mary Claire Franko and Charles Stimac, Jr. ("mortgagors") appeal the decree of foreclosure on the property at 33400 Pinetree Road, Pepper Pike, Ohio. We affirm. {¶ 2} Franko executed a promissory note for $300,000, secured by a mortgage signed by both Franko and Stimac in 2005. The complete mortgage instrument named RBC Mortgage Compan

ACCEPTED 03-14-00737-CV 4701431 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Williams (2025 NY Slip Op 05939) Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Williams 2025 NY Slip Op 05939 Decided on October 29, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. </

HOWARD, Chief Judge. The appellants in these consolidated appeals, Heang Ouch and Morcos Hanna, seek to represent a putative class of borrowers who have not kept up with their mortgage loan payments. Because of this delinquency, their loan servicers made a number, of contractually-mandated advances of funds to the holders of the notes. The borrowers now argue that, despite their own

Carlson v Dorsey (2018 NY Slip Op 03399) Carlson v Dorsey 2018 NY Slip Op 03399 Decided on May 10, 2018 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 4

Filed 2/1/24 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO CITY OF NORWALK, B327413 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. 22STCV33737) CITY OF CERRITOS, Defendant and Respondent. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Cour

Filed 2/22/24 (unmodified opn. attached) CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO B327413 CITY OF NORWALK, (Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Appellant, Super. Ct. No. 22STCV33737) v.

JED S. RAKOFF, U.S.D.J. *686On September 24, 2012, Peter D. Grubea ("Relator") filed a "qui tarn" action on behalf of the United States of America (the "Government") against Rosicki, Rosicki & Associates ("Rosicki"), Enterprise Process Service, Inc. ("Enterprise"), Paramount Land, Inc. ("Paramount"), Threshold Land, Inc. ("Threshold") (co

MEMORANDUM DECISION ROBERT E. GROSSMAN, Bankruptcy Judge. I. INTRODUCTION The matter before the Court is pursuant to the complaint filed by Richard L. Stern (the “Plaintiff’), the Chapter 7 Trustee of *61the estate of Debra J. Asher (the “Debt- or”). The Defendants are Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“DBNTC”

GERARD E. LYNCH, Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs-appellants brought this action under the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq., against defendant-appellee American Medical Response, Inc. (“AMR”), alleging (1) in a qui tam claim, that AMR made false statements and submitted false claims to

ORDER J.P. Stadtmueller, United States District Judge The plaintiff, Victor Le (“Le”), on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, filed the complaint in this action on September 30, 2015. (Docket # 1). In short, Le claims that he and putative class members have suffered — and continue to suffer— from unfair, deceptive, and unlawful business practices implemented by the defendants, collectively

SUMMARY ORDER Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (“Liberty”)1 appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Crotty, J.) dismissing its Second Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history of the case, and issues on appeal. <

249 F.Supp.2d 387 (2003) CONSOLIDATED EDISON, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant v. NORTHEAST UTILITIES, Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff. No. 01 CIV.1893(JGK). United States District Court, S.D. New York. March 21, 2003. *390 AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER KOELTL, District Judge. This case arises